[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 31 (Friday, February 14, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7476-7489]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-3698]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[FRL-7452-2]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Rhode Island; 
One Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration for the Rhode Island Ozone 
Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to fully approve the one-hour ozone 
attainment demonstration State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Rhode 
Island serious ozone nonattainment area, submitted by the Rhode Island 
Department of Environmental Protection on January 27, 2003. This action 
is based on the requirements of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990, 
related to one-hour ozone attainment demonstrations.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 17, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Written comments (two copies if possible) should be sent to: 
David B. Conroy at the EPA Region I (New England) Office, One Congress 
Street, Suite 1100-CAQ, Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2023.
    Copies of the state submittal and EPA's technical support document 
(TSD) are available for public inspection during normal business hours 
(9 A.M. to 4 P.M.) at the following addresses: U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 1 (New England), One Congress St., 11th 
Floor, Boston, Massachusetts, telephone (617) 918-1664, and at the 
Office of Air Resources, Department of Environmental Management, 235 
Promenade Street, Providence, Rhode Island 02908-5767. Please telephone 
in advance before visiting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard P. Burkhart, (617) 918-1664.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice provides an analysis of the one-
hour ozone attainment demonstration SIP submitted by the Rhode Island 
Department of Environmental Management (Rhode Island DEM) in proposed 
form on January 27, 2003 for the Rhode Island serious ozone 
nonattainment area. This revision is being proposed under a procedure 
called parallel processing. Under parallel processing, EPA proposes 
action on a state submission before it has been formally submitted to 
EPA, and will take final action on its proposal if the final submission 
is substantially unchanged from the submission on which proposal is 
based, or if significant changes in the final submission are 
anticipated and adequately described in EPA's proposal as a basis for 
EPA's proposed action.
    The Rhode Island DEM will hold a public hearing on its proposed SIP 
revision on February 27, 2003. The SIP revision that Rhode Island has 
proposed includes all the basic elements of what EPA is proposing to 
approve. If the proposed attainment demonstration plan is substantially 
changed, EPA will evaluate those changes and may publish another notice 
of proposed rulemaking. If no substantial changes are made, EPA will 
approve the state's plan consistent with this proposal and any 
submitted comments. Before EPA can finally approve this SIP revision, 
Rhode Island must finally adopt the SIP revision and submit it formally 
to EPA for incorporation into the SIP.

Table of Contents

I. Clean Air Act Requirements for Serious Ozone Nonattainment Areas
II. Background and Current Air Quality Status of the Rhode Island 
Ozone Nonattainment Area
III. History and Time Frame for the State's Attainment Demonstration 
SIP
IV. What are the Components of a Modeled Attainment Demonstration?
V. What is the Framework for Proposing Action on the Attainment 
Demonstration SIPs?
VI. What are the Relevant Policy and Guidance Documents?
VII. How Does the Rhode Island Submittal Satisfy the Framework?
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Administrative Requirements

I. Clean Air Act Requirements for Serious Ozone Nonattainment Areas

    The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to establish national ambient 
air quality standards (NAAQS or standards) for certain widespread 
pollutants that cause or contribute to air pollution that is reasonably 
anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. CAA sections 108 and 
109. In 1979, EPA promulgated the one-hour 0.12 parts per million (ppm) 
ground-level ozone standard. 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). Ground-
level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, emissions of 
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 
react in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level ozone. 
NOX and VOC are referred to as precursors of ozone.
    An area exceeds the one-hour ozone standard each time an ambient 
air quality monitor records a one-hour average ozone concentration of 
0.125 ppm or higher.\1\ An area is violating the standard if, over a 
consecutive three-year period, more than three exceedances are expected 
to occur at any one monitor. The area's 4th highest ozone reading at a 
single monitor is its design value. The CAA, as amended in 1990, 
required EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that was violating 
the one-hour ozone standard, generally based on air quality monitoring 
data from the three-year period from 1987-1989. CAA section 107(d)(4); 
56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). The CAA further classified these areas, 
based on the area's design value, as marginal, moderate, serious, 
severe, or extreme. CAA section 181(a). Marginal areas were suffering 
the least significant air pollution problems while the areas classified 
as severe and extreme had the most significant air pollution problems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The one-hour ozone standard is 0.12 ppm. EPA's long-standing 
practice is that monitored values of 0.125 ppm or higher are rounded 
up, and thus considered an exceedance of the NAAQS and values less 
than 0.125 ppm are rounded down and are not an exceedance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The control requirements and dates by which attainment needs to be 
achieved vary with the area's classification. Marginal areas are 
subject to the fewest mandated control requirements and have the 
earliest attainment date. Severe and extreme areas are subject to more 
stringent planning requirements but are provided more time to attain 
the standard. Serious areas were required to attain the one-hour ozone 
standard by November 15, 1999 and severe areas are required to attain 
by November 15, 2005 or November 15, 2007. The Rhode Island ozone 
nonattainment area is classified as serious and its attainment date is 
November 15, 1999.
    Under section 182(c)(2) of the CAA, serious areas were required to 
submit by November 15, 1994 demonstrations of how they would attain the 
one-hour ozone standard and how they would achieve reductions in VOC 
emissions of 9 percent for each three-year period until the attainment 
year. In some cases, NOX emission reductions can be 
substituted for the required VOC emission reductions.
    In general, an attainment demonstration SIP includes a modeling 
analysis component showing how the area will achieve the standard by 
its attainment date and the control

[[Page 7477]]

measures necessary to achieve those reductions. Another component of 
the attainment demonstration SIP is a motor vehicle emissions budgets 
for transportation conformity purposes. Transportation conformity is a 
process for ensuring that the effects of emissions associated with new 
or improved federally-funded roadways and transit are considered before 
they are Federally funded or approved. As described in section 
176(c)(2)(A) of the CAA, attainment demonstrations necessarily include 
the estimates of motor vehicle emissions that are consistent with 
attainment, which then act as a budget or ceiling for the purposes of 
determining whether federally-supported transportation plans, 
transportation implementation programs, and projects conform to the 
attainment demonstration SIP.

II. Background and Current Air Quality Status of the Rhode Island Ozone 
Nonattainment Area

    The Rhode Island ozone nonattainment area is a state wide area. 
Historically and throughout most of the 1990's, ozone monitors 
throughout the Rhode Island nonattainment area violated the one-hour 
ozone standard. Directly downwind of the Rhode Island nonattainment 
area, there were also a number of other nonattainment areas violating 
the one-hour ozone standard during the 1990's in Massachusetts, New 
Hampshire, and in portions of southern Maine.
    On June 9, 1999, EPA determined that the Rhode Island serious ozone 
nonattainment area had attained the 1-hour ozone standard (64 FR 
30911).\2\ This determination was based on data collected from 1996-
1998. On June 9, 1999, EPA also determined that the Eastern 
Massachusetts area, the Portsmouth-Dover-Rochester, New Hampshire ozone 
nonattainment area, and the Portland, Maine ozone nonattainment area 
had also attained the 1-hour ozone standard based on data collected 
from 1996-1998. See 64 FR 30911. At the time of these determinations of 
attainment, there were no areas in any portion of Rhode Island, Eastern 
Massachusetts, New Hampshire or Maine that violated the one-hour ozone 
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In that notice, EPA also determined the one-hour ozone 
standard no longer applied to the Rhode Island area. Subsequently, 
due to continued litigation regarding the 8-hour ozone standard, EPA 
reinstated the applicability of the one-hour ozone standard in all 
areas. See 65 FR 45182 (July 20, 2000). EPA, however, did not modify 
its determination that the Rhode Island area had attained the one-
hour ozone standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rhode Island nonattainment area continued to have air quality 
meeting the one-hour ozone standard in 1999 (based on data from 1997-
1999) and in 2000 (based on data from 1998-2000). Based on data 
collected in 1999-2001, however, the Rhode Island area now has air 
quality violating the one-hour ozone standard. The violating monitors, 
based on 1999-2001 ozone data, are in West Greenwich, East Providence, 
and Narragansett, Rhode Island. Ozone data readings from the monitors 
for the area from the summer of 2002 now show only the West Greenwich 
and East Providence monitors registering a violation of the one-hour 
ozone NAAQS for the three-year period 2000-2002.

III. History and Time Frame for the State's Attainment Demonstration 
SIP

A. Ozone Transport Assessment Group and the NOX SIP Call

    Notwithstanding significant efforts by the states, in 1995 EPA 
recognized that many states in the eastern half of the United States 
could not meet the November 1994 time frame for submitting an 
attainment demonstration SIP because emissions of NOX and 
VOCs in upwind states (and the ozone formed by these emissions) 
affected these nonattainment areas and the full impact of this effect 
had not yet been determined. This phenomenon is called ozone transport.
    On March 2, 1995, Mary D. Nichols, EPA's then Assistant 
Administrator for Air and Radiation, issued a memorandum to EPA's 
Regional Administrators acknowledging the efforts made by states but 
noting the remaining difficulties in making attainment demonstration 
SIP submittals.\3\ Recognizing the problems created by ozone transport, 
the March 2, 1995 memorandum called for a collaborative process among 
the states in the eastern half of the country to evaluate and address 
transport of ozone and its precursors. This memorandum led to the 
formation of the Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG)\4\ and 
provided for the states to submit the attainment demonstration SIPs 
based on the expected time frames for OTAG to complete its evaluation 
of ozone transport.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Memorandum, ``Ozone Attainment Demonstrations,'' issued 
March 2, 1995. A copy of the memorandum may be found on EPA's Web 
site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
    \4\ Letter from Mary A. Gade, Director, State of Illinois 
Environmental Protection Agency to Environmental Council of States 
(ECOS) Members, dated April 13, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In June 1997, OTAG concluded and provided EPA with recommendations 
regarding ozone transport. The OTAG generally concluded that transport 
of ozone and the precursor NOX is significant and should be 
reduced regionally to enable states in the eastern half of the country 
to attain the ozone NAAQS.
    In recognition of the length of the OTAG process, in a December 29, 
1997 memorandum, Richard Wilson, EPA's then Acting Assistant 
Administrator for Air and Radiation, provided until April 1998 for 
states to submit the following elements of their attainment 
demonstration SIPs for serious and severe nonattainment areas: (1) 
Evidence that the applicable control measures in subpart 2 of part D of 
title I of the CAA were adopted and implemented or were on an 
expeditious course to being adopted and implemented; (2) a list of 
measures needed to meet the remaining rate-of-progress (ROP) emissions 
reduction requirement and to reach attainment; (3) for severe areas 
only, a commitment to adopt and submit target calculations for post-
1999 ROP and the control measures necessary for attainment and ROP 
plans through the attainment year by the end of 2000; (4) a commitment 
to implement the SIP control programs in a timely manner and to meet 
ROP emissions reductions and attainment; and (5) evidence of a public 
hearing on the state submittal.\5\ This submission is sometimes 
referred to as the Phase 2 submission. Motor vehicle emissions budgets 
can be established based on a commitment to adopt the measures needed 
for attainment and identification of the measures needed. Thus, state 
submissions due in April 1998 under the Wilson policy should have 
included motor vehicle emissions budgets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Memorandum, ``Guidance for Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and 
Pre-Existing PM 10 NAAQS,'' issued December 29, 1997. A copy of this 
memorandum may be found on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Building upon the OTAG recommendations and technical analyses, in 
November 1997, EPA proposed action addressing the ozone transport 
problem. In its proposal, EPA found that current SIPs in 22 states and 
the District of Columbia (23 jurisdictions) were insufficient to 
provide for attainment and maintenance of the one-hour ozone standard 
because they did not regulate NOX emissions that 
significantly contribute to ozone transport. 62 FR 60318 (November 7, 
1997). The EPA finalized that rule in September 1998, calling on the 23 
jurisdictions to revise their SIPs to require NOX emissions 
reductions within the state to a level consistent with a NOX 
emissions budget identified in the final rule. 63 FR 57356 (October 27, 
1998). This final rule is commonly referred to as the NOX 
SIP Call.

[[Page 7478]]

B. Rhode Island Ozone Attainment Demonstration Submittal

    Unlike other states with serious ozone nonattainment areas, Rhode 
Island did not in 1998 submit a final ozone attainment demonstration as 
a SIP revision pursuant to EPA's December 29, 1997 memorandum. Based on 
data collected from 1996-1998, EPA determined on June 9, 1999 (64 FR 
30911) that the Rhode Island serious ozone nonattainment area had 
attained the 1-hour ozone standard. Consistent with EPA policy, since 
the Rhode Island area had attained the standard by November 15, 1999, 
its statutory attainment date, Rhode Island did not need to submit an 
attainment demonstration to EPA for EPA to take action on.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Policy guidance contained in a May 10, 1995 memorandum from 
John Seitz, Director of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, entitled ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment 
Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 
Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard'' 
recommends that ROP and attainment demonstration requirements, along 
with certain other related requirements, of Part D of Title 1 of the 
Clean Air Act are no longer applicable to an area once it has air 
quality data indicating that the one hour ozone standard has been 
attained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rhode Island nonattainment area continued to have air quality 
meeting the one-hour ozone standard through the summer of 2000, and it 
was not until after the summer of 2001 that the Rhode Island area had 
air quality violating the one-hour ozone standard. At that point in 
time, this nonattainment area was once again required to have an 
approved attainment demonstration and ROP plan with respect to section 
182(c)(2) of the CAA. Today, in this proposed rule, EPA is proposing 
action on the proposed attainment demonstration SIP submitted by the 
Rhode Island DEM on January 27, 2003. EPA has previously approved the 
state's 15% plan (63 FR 67594, 12/8/98) and 9% ROP plan (66 FR 30811, 
6/8/01).
    The Rhode Island Attainment Demonstration contains the following 
elements: (1) The required photochemical grid attainment demonstration 
modeling, supplemented with a weight-of-evidence (WOE) analysis showing 
how attainment will be achieved; (2) an analysis showing that Rhode 
Island is implementing all reasonably available control measures (RACM) 
and that no other RACM could be adopted in Rhode Island that would 
advance the attainment year; (3) motor vehicle emissions budgets for 
the attainment year, which are used for conformity determinations, and 
(4) contingency measures as required pursuant to section 172(c)(9) of 
the CAA. Rhode Island Department of Environmental Protection will hold 
a public hearing on this Attainment Demonstration SIP on February 27, 
2003.
    The statutory attainment date for the Rhode Island Area was 
November 15, 1999. The area attained the standard as of its attainment 
date, but then subsequently experienced a violation. The CAA does not 
expressly address the appropriate attainment date for an area that 
attains the standard by its attainment date but then subsequently 
violates the standard nor does it address the planning requirements 
that apply to such an area. (CAA sections 179 (c) and (d) and 181(b)(2) 
establish requirements only for those areas that EPA determines do not 
attain the standard by their attainment date.) With respect to the 
attainment date, both subparts 1 and 2 specify outside dates for 
attainment and provide that attainment must be ``as expeditiously as 
practicable.'' CAA sections 172(a)(2) and 181(a)(1). With respect to 
control obligations, EPA generally attempts first to work with the 
State to submit a revised SIP and, where necessary, would issue a SIP 
Call pursuant to section 110(k)(5). See e.g., 65 FR 64352 (Oct. 27, 
2000). Here, Rhode Island is already well on its way to submitting a 
final attainment demonstration and has indicated that the demonstration 
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable, i.e. by 
November 15, 2007. We review Rhode Island's submission in the following 
sections.

IV. What Are the Components of a Modeled Attainment Demonstration?

    The EPA provides that states may rely on a modeled attainment 
demonstration supplemented with additional evidence to account for 
inherent uncertainty in the modeling.\7\ In order to have a complete 
modeling demonstration submission, states should have submitted the 
required modeling analysis and identified any additional evidence that 
EPA should consider in evaluating whether the area will attain the 
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The EPA issued guidance on the air quality modeling that is 
used to demonstrate attainment with the one-hour ozone NAAQS. See 
U.S. EPA, (1991), Guideline for Regulatory Application of the Urban 
Airshed Model, EPA-450/4-91-013, (July 1991). A copy may be found on 
EPA's web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name: 
``UAMREG''). See also U.S. EPA, (1996), Guidance on Use of Modeled 
Results to Demonstrate Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS, EPA-454/B-95-
007, (June 1996). A copy may be found on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name: ``O3TEST'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Modeling Requirements

    For purposes of demonstrating attainment, section 182(c) of the CAA 
requires serious areas to use photochemical grid modeling or an 
analytical method EPA determines to be as effective.\8\ The 
photochemical grid model is set up using meteorological conditions 
conducive to the formation of ozone. Emissions for a base year are used 
to evaluate the model's ability to reproduce actual monitored air 
quality values and to predict air quality changes in the attainment 
year due to the emission changes which include growth up to and 
controls implemented by the attainment year. A modeling domain is 
chosen that encompasses the nonattainment area. Attainment is 
demonstrated when all predicted concentrations inside the modeling 
domain are at or below the NAAQS or at an acceptable upper limit above 
the NAAQS consistent with conditions specified by EPA's guidance. When 
the predicted concentrations are above the NAAQS, an optional weight-
of-evidence determination which incorporates, but is not limited to, 
other analyses, such as air quality and emissions trends, may be used 
to address uncertainty inherent in the application of photochemical 
grid models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA guidance identifies the features of a modeling analysis 
that are essential to obtain credible results. First, the state must 
develop and implement a modeling protocol. The modeling protocol 
describes the methods and procedures to be used in conducting the 
modeling analysis and provides for policy oversight and technical 
review by individuals responsible for developing or assessing the 
attainment demonstration (state and local agencies, EPA Regional 
offices, the regulated community, and public interest groups). Second, 
for purposes of developing the information to put into the model, the 
state must select air pollution days, i.e., days in the past with poor 
air quality, that are representative of the ozone pollution problem for 
the nonattainment area. Third, the state needs to identify the 
appropriate dimensions of the area to be modeled, i.e., the domain 
size. The domain should be larger than the designated nonattainment 
area to reduce uncertainty in the boundary conditions and should 
include large upwind sources just outside the nonattainment area. In 
general, the domain is considered the local area where control measures 
are most beneficial to bring the area into attainment. Fourth, the 
state needs to determine the grid

[[Page 7479]]

resolution. The horizontal and vertical resolutions in the model affect 
the dispersion and transport of emission plumes. Artificially large 
grid cells (too few vertical layers and horizontal grids) may dilute 
concentrations and may not properly consider impacts of complex 
terrain, complex meteorology, and land/water interfaces. Fifth, the 
state needs to generate meteorological data that describe atmospheric 
conditions and emissions inputs. Finally, the state needs to verify 
that the model is properly simulating the chemistry and atmospheric 
conditions through diagnostic analyses and model performance tests. 
Once these steps are satisfactorily completed, the model is ready to be 
used to generate air quality estimates to support an attainment 
demonstration.
    The modeled attainment test compares model-predicted one-hour daily 
maximum concentrations in all grid cells for the attainment year to the 
level of the NAAQS. A predicted concentration above 0.124 ppm ozone 
indicates that the area is expected to exceed the standard in the 
attainment year and a prediction at or below 0.124 ppm indicates that 
the area is expected to attain the standard. This type of test is often 
referred to as an exceedance test. The EPA's guidance recommends that 
states use either of two modeled attainment or exceedance tests for the 
one-hour ozone NAAQS: a deterministic test or a statistical test.
    The deterministic test requires the state to compare predicted one-
hour daily maximum ozone concentrations for each modeled day \9\ to the 
attainment level of 0.124 ppm. If none of the predictions exceed 0.124 
ppm, the test is passed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The initial, ``ramp-up'' days for each episode are excluded 
from this determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The statistical test takes into account the fact that the form of 
the one-hour ozone standard allows exceedances. If, over a three-year 
period, the area has an average of one or fewer exceedances per year, 
the area is not violating the standard. Thus, if the state models a 
very extreme day, the statistical test provides that a prediction above 
0.124 ppm up to a certain upper limit may be consistent with attainment 
of the standard. (The form of the one-hour ozone standard allows for up 
to three readings above the standard over a three-year period before an 
area is considered to be in violation.)
    The acceptable upper limit above 0.124 ppm is determined by 
examining the size of exceedances at monitoring sites which meet the 
one-hour NAAQS. For example, a monitoring site for which the four 
highest one-hour average concentrations over a three-year period are 
0.136 ppm, 0.130 ppm, 0.128 ppm and 0.122 ppm is attaining the 
standard. To identify an acceptable upper limit, the statistical 
likelihood of observing ozone air quality exceedances of the standard 
of various concentrations is equated to the severity of the modeled 
day. The upper limit generally represents the maximum ozone 
concentration observed at a location on a single day and it would be 
the only reading above the standard that would be expected to occur no 
more than an average of once a year over a three-year period. 
Therefore, if the maximum ozone concentration predicted by the model is 
below the acceptable upper limit, in this case 0.136 ppm, then EPA 
might conclude that the modeled attainment test is passed. Generally, 
exceedances well above 0.124 ppm are very unusual at monitoring sites 
meeting the NAAQS. Thus, these upper limits are rarely substantially 
higher than the attainment level of 0.124 ppm.

B. Additional Analyses Where Modeling Fails To Show Attainment

    As with other predictive tools, there are inherent uncertainties 
associated with modeling and its results. For example, there are 
uncertainties in some of the modeling inputs, such as the 
meteorological and emissions data bases for individual days and in the 
methodology used to assess the severity of an exceedance at individual 
sites. The EPA's guidance recognizes these limitations, and provides a 
means for considering other evidence to help assess whether attainment 
of the NAAQS is likely. The process by which this is done is called a 
weight-of-evidence determination.
    Under a WOE determination, the state can rely on and EPA will 
consider factors such as: other modeled attainment tests, e.g., a 
rollback analysis; other modeled outputs, e.g., changes in the 
predicted frequency and pervasiveness of exceedances and predicted 
changes in the design value; actual observed air quality trends; 
estimated emissions trends; analyses of air quality monitored data; the 
responsiveness of the model predictions to further controls; and, 
whether there are additional control measures that are or will be 
approved into the SIP but were not included in the modeling analysis. 
This list is not an exclusive list of factors that may be considered 
and these factors could vary from case to case. For example, the EPA's 
guidance contains no limit on how close a modeled attainment test must 
be to passing to conclude that other evidence besides an attainment 
test is sufficiently compelling to suggest attainment. However, the 
further a modeled attainment test is from being passed, the more 
compelling the WOE needs to be.
    The EPA's modeling guidance also recognizes a need to perform a 
mid-course review as a means for addressing uncertainty in the modeling 
results. Because of the uncertainty in long term projections, EPA 
believes a viable attainment demonstration that relies on WOE needs to 
contain provisions for periodic review of monitoring, emissions, and 
modeling data to assess the extent to which refinements to emission 
control measures are needed. The mid-course review is discussed below.

V. What Is the Framework for Proposing Action on the Attainment 
Demonstration SIPs?

    In addition to the modeling analysis and WOE support demonstrating 
attainment, the EPA has identified the following key elements which 
generally must be present in order for EPA to approve the one-hour 
attainment demonstration SIPs. These elements are: measures required by 
the CAA and measures relied on in the modeled attainment demonstration 
SIP; NOX reductions affecting boundary conditions; motor 
vehicle emissions budgets; any additional measures needed for 
attainment\10\; and a Mid-Course Review (MCR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As discussed in detail below, the Rhode Island attainment 
demonstration shows attainment without the need for additional 
measures beyond what has been adopted into the SIP or will be 
required by federal regulations. Therefore additional measures are 
not required for Rhode Island.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. CAA Measures and Measures Relied on in the Modeled Attainment 
Demonstration SIP

    The states should have adopted the control measures already 
required under the CAA for the area classification. In addition, a 
state may have included control measures in its attainment strategy 
that are in addition to measures required in the CAA. For purposes of 
fully approving the state's SIP, the state needs to adopt and submit 
all VOC and NOX controls within the local modeling domain 
that were relied on for purposes of the modeled attainment 
demonstration.
    The information in Table 1 is a summary of the CAA requirements 
that should be met for a serious area for the one-hour ozone NAAQS. 
These requirements are specified in section 182 of the CAA. EPA must 
have taken final action approving all measures

[[Page 7480]]

relied on for attainment, including the required ROP control measures 
and target calculations, before EPA can issue a final full approval of 
the attainment demonstration as meeting CAA section 182(c)(2). This was 
done for all the measures for Rhode Island.

              Table 1.--CAA Requirements for Serious Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--NSR for VOC and NOX\11\, including an offset ratio of 1.2:1 and a
 major VOC and NOX source cutoff of 50 tons per year
--Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) for VOC and NOX \11\.
--Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) program.
--15% volatile organic compound plans.
--Emissions inventory.
--Emission statements.
--Periodic inventories.
--Attainment demonstration.
--9 percent ROP plan through 1999.
--Clean fuels program or substitute.
--Enhanced monitoring Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations.
--Stage II vapor recovery.
--Contingency measures.
--Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Unless the area has in effect a NOX waiver under section 182(f).
  The Rhode Island area is not such an area.

1. Control Measures Adopted by Rhode Island
    Adopted and submitted rules for all previously required CAA 
mandated measures for the specific area classification that are being 
relied on in the attainment demonstration are required. This also 
includes measures that may not be required for the area classification 
but that the state relied on in the SIP submission for attainment. As 
explained in Table 2, Rhode Island has submitted and EPA has approved 
SIPs for all of the measures the state is relying on for attainment.

Table 2.--Control Measures in the One-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan for the
              Rhode Island Serious Ozone Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Name of control measure      Type of measure      Approval status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-board Refueling Vapor        Federal rule.....  Promulgated at 40 CFR
 Recovery.                                          part 86.
Federal Motor Vehicle Control   Federal rule.....  Promulgated at 40 CFR
 program (Tier 0).                                  part 86 (pre-1990).
Heavy Duty Diesel Engines (On-  Federal rule.....  Promulgated at 40 CFR
 road).                                             part 86.
Federal Non-road Heavy Duty     Federal rule.....  Promulgated at 40 CFR
 diesel engines.                                    part 89.
Federal Non-road Gasoline       Federal rule.....  Promulgated at 40 CFR
 Engines.                                           part 90.
Federal Marine Engines........  Federal rule.....  Promulgated at 40 CFR
                                                    part 91.
Rail Road Locomotive Controls.  Federal rule.....  Promulgated at 40 CFR
                                                    part 92.
Automotive Refinishing........  State initiative.  SIP approved (61 FR
                                                    3827; 2/2/96).
Enhanced Inspection &           CAA SIP            SIP approved (66 FR
 Maintenance.                    Requirement.       9663; 2/9/01).
NOX RACT......................  CAA SIP            SIP approved (62 FR
                                 Requirement.       46202; 9/2/97).
VOC RACT pursuant to sections   CAA SIP            SIP approved (59 FR
 182(a)(2)(A) and 182(b)(2)(B)   Requirement.       52429; 10/18/94).
 of CAA.
VOC RACT pursuant to section    CAA SIP            Marine vessel loading
 182(b)(2)(A) and (C) of CAA.    Requirement.       SIP approved (61 FR
                                                    14975; 4/4/96).
                                                    limited approval for
                                                    non-CTG RACT rule
                                                    (61 FR 14975; 4/4/96
                                                    64 FR 67500; 12/2/
                                                    99). EPA approval
                                                    pending for certain
                                                    non-CTG RACT
                                                    determinations. The
                                                    state does not rely
                                                    on reductions from
                                                    the facilities with
                                                    approval pending for
                                                    attainment.
Stage II Vapor Recovery.......  CAA SIP            SIP Approved (58 FR
                                 Requirement.       65933; 12/17/93).
Reformulated Gasoline.........  State opt-in.....  SIP approved (65 FR
                                                    12476; 3/9/00).
National Low Emission Vehicle   State opt-in.....  Federal program
 (NLEV).                                            promulgated at 40
                                                    CFR 86 subpart R.
                                                    State opt-in SIP
                                                    approved (65 FR
                                                    12476; 3/9/00).
Clean Fuel Fleets.............  CAA SIP            SIP approved (65 FR
                                 Requirement.       12476; 3/9/00).
                                                    Rhode Island used
                                                    RFG reductions to
                                                    meet the Clean Fuel
                                                    Fleet requirement.
Base Year Emissions Inventory.  CAA SIP            SIP approved (61 FR
                                 Requirement.       55902; 10/30/96,
                                                    amended 63 FR 67600,
                                                    12/8/98).
15% VOC Reduction Plan and      CAA SIP            SIP approved (63 FR
 Contingency Plan.               Requirement.       67594; 12/8/98).
9% rate of progress plan......  CAA SIP            SIP approved (66 FR
                                 Requirement.       30811; 6/8/01).
Emissions Statements..........  CAA SIP            SIP approved (60 FR
                                 Requirement.       2526; 1/10/95).
Enhanced Monitoring (PAMS)....  CAA SIP            SIP approved (61 FR
                                 Requirement.       55897; 10/30/96).
OTC NOX MOU Phase II..........  State initiative.  SIP approved (64 FR
                                                    29567; 6/2/99).
NOX SIP Call..................  CAA requirement    SIP approved (65 FR
                                 established        81748; 12/27/00).
                                 pursuant to SIP
                                 call.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 7481]]

B. NOX Reductions Consistent With the Modeling Demonstration

    On October 27, 1998, EPA completed rulemaking on the NOX 
SIP call which required states to address transport of NOX 
and ozone to other states. To address transport, the NOX SIP 
call established emissions budgets for NOX that 23 
jurisdictions were required to show they would meet by 2007 through 
enforceable SIP measures adopted and submitted by September 30, 1999. 
The NOX SIP call is intended to reduce emissions in upwind 
states that significantly contribute to nonattainment problems. The EPA 
did not identify specific sources that the states must regulate nor did 
EPA limit the states' choices regarding where to achieve the emission 
reductions. The courts have largely upheld EPA's NOX SIP 
Call, Michigan v. United States Env. Prot. Agency, 213 F.3d 663 (D.C. 
Cir. 2000), cert. denied, U.S., 121 S.Ct. 1225, 149 L.Ed. 135 (2001); 
Appalachian Power v. EPA, 251 F.3d 1026 (D.C. Cir. 2001). Although a 
few issues were vacated or remanded to EPA for further consideration, 
states subject to the NOX SIP call have largely adopted the 
controls necessary to meet the budgets set for them under the 
NOX SIP call rule. The controls to achieve these reductions 
should be in place by May 2004.
    Rhode Island used the best available NOX SIP Call 
information in its modeling analysis. The modeling analysis is 
discussed in more detail below. Furthermore, Rhode Island adopted 
control measures to meet the requirements of the NOX SIP 
call. EPA approved the regulation Rhode Island adopted pursuant to the 
NOX SIP call on December 27, 2000 (65 FR 81748).

C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs)

    The EPA believes that attainment demonstration SIPs must 
necessarily estimate the level of motor vehicle emissions, which when 
considered with emissions from all other sources (stationary, area and 
other mobile source), is consistent with attainment. The estimate of 
motor vehicle emissions is used to determine the conformity of 
transportation plans and programs to the SIP, as described by CAA 
section 176(c)(2)(A). For transportation conformity purposes, the 
estimate of motor vehicle emissions is known as the motor vehicle 
emissions budget. The EPA believes that appropriately identified motor 
vehicle emissions budgets are a necessary part of an attainment 
demonstration SIP. A SIP cannot effectively demonstrate attainment 
unless it identifies the level of motor vehicle emissions that can be 
produced while still demonstrating attainment. See section VII.I. below 
for the discussion of the motor vehicle emissions budgets included in 
the Rhode Island attainment demonstration.

D. Mid-Course Review

    A mid-course review (MCR), which generally is performed midway 
between approval of the attainment demonstration and the attainment 
date, is a reassessment of modeling analyses and more recent monitored 
data to determine if a prescribed control strategy is resulting in 
emission reductions and air quality improvements needed to attain the 
ambient air quality standard for ozone as expeditiously as practicable. 
See section VII.G. below for additional discussion on Rhode Island's 
mid-course review.

E. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

    Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires SIPs to contain all RACM and 
provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable. EPA has 
previously provided guidance interpreting the requirements of 
172(c)(1). See 57 FR 13498, 13560. In that guidance, EPA indicated its 
interpretation that potentially available measures that would not 
advance the attainment date for an area would not be considered RACM. 
EPA also indicated in that guidance that states should consider all 
potentially available measures to determine whether they were 
reasonably available for implementation in the area, and whether they 
would advance the attainment date. Further, states should indicate in 
their SIP submittals whether measures considered were reasonably 
available or not, and if measures are reasonably available they must be 
adopted as RACM. Finally, EPA indicated that states could reject 
measures as not being RACM because they would not advance the 
attainment date, would cause substantial widespread and long-term 
adverse impacts, would be economically or technologically infeasible, 
or would otherwise be inappropriate for local reasons, including costs. 
The EPA also issued a memorandum re-confirming the principles in the 
earlier guidance, entitled, ``Guidance on the Reasonably Available 
Control Measures (RACM) Requirement and Attainment Demonstration 
Submissions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas.'' John S. Seitz, Director, 
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. November 30, 1999. Web 
site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
    When EPA presented its statutory argument in support of its RACM 
policy to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in defense of 
its approval of the Washington D.C. ozone SIP, the D.C. Circuit found 
reasonable EPA's interpretation that measures must advance attainment 
to be RACM. Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (D.C. Cir. 2002). 
Specifically, the Court found that:

    EPA reasonably concluded that because the Act `use[s] the same 
terminology in conjunction with the RACM requirement' as it does in 
requiring timely attainment, compare 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(1) (requiring 
implementation of RACM `as expeditiously as practicable but no later 
than' the applicable attainment deadline), with id. Sec.  7511(a)(1) 
(requiring attainment under same constraints), the RACM requirement 
is to be understood as a means of meeting the deadline for 
attainment.

Id. Morever, the D.C. Circuit rejected, as a ``misreading of both text 
and context,'' Sierra Club's arguments that EPA's interpretation of 
RACM conflicts with the Act's text and purpose and lacks any rational 
basis. The D.C. Circuit also found reasonable EPA's interpretation that 
it could consider costs in a RACM analysis and that measures may be 
rejected if they would require an intensive and costly effort for 
regulation of many small sources. Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d at 
162,163. See section VII.H. below for additional discussion on Rhode 
Island's RACM analysis.

VI. What Are the Relevant Policy and Guidance Documents?

    This proposal has cited several policy and guidance memoranda. The 
documents and their location on EPA's web site are listed below; these 
documents will also be placed in the docket for this proposal action.

Relevant Documents

    1. ``Guidance for Improving Weight of Evidence Through 
Identification of Additional Emission Reductions, Not Modeled.'' U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division, Air Quality 
Modeling Group, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. November 1999. Web 
site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram (file name: ``ADDWOE1H'').
    2. ``Serious and Severe Ozone Nonattainment Areas: Information on 
Emissions, Control Measures Adopted or Planned and Other Available 
Control Measures.'' November 24, 1999. OAQPS. U.S. EPA, RTP, NC.
    3. Memorandum, ``Guidance on Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in 
One-Hour

[[Page 7482]]

Attainment Demonstrations,'' from Merrylin Zaw-Mon, Office of Mobile 
Sources, to the Air Division Directors, Regions I-VI. November 3, 1999. 
Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/transp/trafconf.html.
    4. Memorandum from Lydia Wegman and Merrylin Zaw-Mon to the Air 
Division Directors, Regions I-VI, ``1-Hour Ozone Attainment 
Demonstrations and Tier 2/Sulfur Rulemaking.'' November 8, 1999. Web 
site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/transp/trafconf.html.
    5. Memorandum from John Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards, ``Mid-Course Review Guidance for the 1-Hour 
Ozone Nonattainment Areas that Rely on Weight-of-Evidence for 
Attainment Demonstration.'' Web site: http://www.epa.gov/scram001/tt25.htm (file name: ``MCRGUIDE'').
    6. Memorandum, ``Guidance to Clarify EPA's Policy on What 
Constitutes ``As Expeditiously as Practicable'' for Purposes of 
Attaining the One-Hour Ozone Standard for Serious and Severe Ozone 
Nonattainment Areas.'' John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards. November 1999. Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
    7. U.S. EPA, (1991), Guideline for Regulatory Application of the 
Urban Airshed Model, EPA-450/4-91-013, (July 1991). Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name: ``UAMREG'').
    8. U.S. EPA, (1996), Guidance on Use of Modeled Results to 
Demonstrate Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS, EPA-454/B-95-007, (June 
1996). Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name: ``O3TEST'').
    9. Memorandum, ``Ozone Attainment Demonstrations,'' from Mary D. 
Nichols, issued March 2, 1995. Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
    10. December 29, 1997 Memorandum from Richard Wilson, Acting 
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation ``Guidance for 
Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and Pre-Existing PM10 NAAQS.'' 
Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.

VII. How Does the Rhode Island Submittal Satisfy the Framework?

    This section provides a review of Rhode Island'' submittal and an 
analysis of how this submittal satisfies the framework discussed in 
Section V. of this notice.

A. What Did the State Submit?

    The attainment demonstration SIP submitted by the Rhode Island 
Department of Environmental Management for the Rhode Island area 
includes a modeling analysis using the CALGRID model. The SIP was 
submitted in proposed form on January 27, 2003. The SIP is subject to 
public notice and comment and a hearing will be held on February 27, 
2003. Information on how the photochemical grid modeling, the RACM 
analysis, the mid-course review and the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 
are consistent with the CAA and EPA guidance is summarized below.
    As explained earlier, the Rhode Island area attained the one-hour 
ozone standard as of 1999, its statutory deadline under the CAA. 
Moreover, the Rhode Island nonattainment area continued to have air 
quality meeting the one-hour ozone standard until the 1999 through 2001 
time period. In its attainment demonstration, Rhode Island provides 
evidence that the area will once again attain by 2007.
    Rhode Island chose a 2007 attainment date because it has determined 
that the current violations are due to upwind emissions, some of which 
cannot be reduced until as late as the beginning of the 2007 ozone 
season. The additional reductions that will occur in upwind areas, as 
well as in Rhode Island, include the following programs: (1) EPA's 
NOX SIP call, which will be implemented by May 31, 2004, 
with states expected to fully comply with their budgets by 2007; (2) 
EPA's Tier 2 standards, which will impose new tailpipe standards for 
motor vehicles and reduce the sulfur content of fuel, and will be 
phased in beginning in 2004; (3) EPA's NOX requirements for 
highway heavy-duty engines (i.e., trucks and buses), which beginning in 
2004 require new diesel trucks and buses to be 50 percent cleaner than 
today's models; (4) new nonroad diesel NOX standards, which 
started in 1996 with increasingly more stringent standards being phased 
in through 2006; and (5) a number of upwind states will adopt new VOC 
controls for architectural coatings and consumer products that will go 
into effect in 2004.
    Rhode Island also notes that New York, New Jersey and Connecticut 
have CAA attainment dates of 2007, which is when these upwind states 
will have fully implemented all measures necessary for them to attain 
the standard. Also, as discussed in section VII.H there is nothing more 
Rhode Island can do to advance their attainment date. Attainment in 
Rhode Island will be achieved when transport of ozone into Rhode Island 
is reduced below the one-hour standard, and the Rhode Island attainment 
plan discussed below shows this will not occur until November 15, 2007. 
Based on this information, EPA agrees that an attainment date of 
November 15, 2007 is as expeditiously as practicable and EPA proposes 
approval of this attainment date for the Rhode Island area.

B. How Was the Photochemical Grid Modeling Conducted?

    The key element of the attainment demonstration is the 
photochemical grid modeling required by the CAA. The Rhode Island SIP 
used the CALGRID model which was approved for use by EPA since it was 
found to be at least as effective as the guideline model which is UAM-
IV. The modeling domain for CALGRID extends from southwest Connecticut, 
northward 340 km to northern Vermont, and eastward to east of 
Nantucket, Massachusetts. For the Rhode Island nonattainment area, the 
domain is consistent with EPA guidance since it contains adequate areas 
both upwind and downwind of the nonattainment area. The domain also 
includes the monitors with the highest measured peak ozone 
concentrations in Rhode Island. Since the CALGRID modeling was done for 
a much larger domain that includes not only all of Rhode Island but 
also includes all of Massachusetts, most of Connecticut, southern New 
Hampshire, southern Vermont, and most of southern Maine, the CALGRID 
model has several ``source'' areas and several receptor areas. The only 
receptor area of import to this notice and the Rhode Island SIP 
submittal is the Rhode Island serious ozone nonattainment area. For the 
purposes of this notice, only model results in Rhode Island will be 
used, unless otherwise noted. As shown below, EPA believes the modeling 
portion of the attainment demonstration is consistent with EPA 
guidance.
    The model was run for 10 days during four distinct episodes (August 
14-17, 1987, June 21-22, 1988, July 7-8, 1988 and July 10-11, 1988). 
These episodes represent a variety of ozone conducive weather 
conditions, and reflect days with high measured ozone in a variety of 
areas within the entire domain. This is because, as stated above, the 
domain covers several nonattainment areas, and in order to model the 
meteorology that causes high ozone, several different episodes were 
needed. The episodes chosen for New England do include the worst ozone 
episode for Rhode Island over the last 15 years. The CALGRID model 
results for the first day of each episode are not used for attainment 
demonstration purposes, because they are considered ``ramp-up days.'' 
Ramp-up days help reduce impacts of initial conditions; after ramp-up 
days, model results are more reflective of actual

[[Page 7483]]

emissions being emitted into the atmosphere. Since the first day of 
each episode was not considered, this leaves six days for strategy 
assessment. August 16, 1987 was also not used for strategy assessment. 
This leaves five strategy days: August 15, 1987; August 17, 1987; June 
22, 1988; July 8, 1988 and July 11, 1988.
    The CALGRID model was run using the CALMET meteorological 
processor. This processor took actual meteorological data collected by 
the National Weather Service and the State Air Pollution Agencies and 
using extrapolation and other analysis techniques provided winds, 
temperatures and other meteorological parameters at approximately 400 
specific grid points for each hour of the episode up to 14 levels 
(i.e., from the surface to top of the model which is about 5000 feet). 
CALMET is described in detail in the Rhode Island attainment 
demonstration, and was approved by EPA for use in the CALGRID modeling 
system.
    The CALGRID model was run with emissions data prepared by EPA 
Region I and/or a contractor working with EPA Region I. The data were 
taken from the EPA Aerometric Informational Retrieval System (AIRS) 
data base in late 1993 and reflect the emission data supplied from the 
six New England States. The emission data for the small portion of New 
York state that forms the western edge of the domain was supplied by 
New York. EPA Region I quality assured all the New England AIRS data, 
the New York supplied data and all necessary modifications to the data. 
The data was further processed through the Emissions Preprocessor 
System (EPS Version 2.0). To more accurately model ozone in New 
England, day specific emissions were simulated for on-road mobile 
sources (cars, trucks, busses, etc.), and for large fossil-fueled fired 
power plants in New England. The base case CALGRID model is consistent 
with EPA guidance on model performance
    Future emissions were projected to 1999 and 2007 accounting for 
both emission increases due to industrial growth, population growth and 
growth in the number of miles traveled by cars, as well as emission 
reductions due to cleaner gasoline, cleaner cars and controls on 
industrial pollution. Growth factors were derived using the EPA-
approved Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) factors and all the 
emissions were processed using the EPS 2.0 system.
    Model runs were also performed for the year 2007. The runs employed 
2007 emission estimates inside the New England Domain, along with 
boundary condition files reflecting EPA's NOX SIP Call 
emission estimates in upwind areas. Year 2007 emissions estimates for 
the states inside the modeling domain reflected EPA's NOX 
SIP call as well as other federal and state control strategies being 
implemented by the beginning of the 2007 ozone season. This was 
accomplished using a two-step process. The first step was to project 
emissions using growth factors to account for increases or decreases in 
economic activity by industrial sector. In general, the states 
projected their emissions using the same growth factors that were used 
in the OTAG modeling effort. The second step involved applying control 
factors to source categories that would be regulated by the year 2007. 
States used a combination of information for control levels: those used 
for the OTAG modeling effort, and state-specific information relating 
to the effectiveness of control programs planned or in place. These 
2007 emission estimates did not, however, include the Tier 2/Gasoline 
Sulfur program that was subsequently adopted by EPA on February 10, 
2000 (65 FR 6698). The ozone reductions in 2007 from the Tier 2/
Gasoline Sulfur program are discussed in Section VII.C.4.

C. What Are the Conclusions From the Modeling?

    The EPA guidance for approval of the modeling aspect of a one-hour 
ozone attainment demonstration is to use the one-hour ozone grid 
modeling to apply one of two modeled attainment tests (deterministic or 
statistical) with optional weight-of-evidence analyses to supplement 
the modeled attainment test results when the modeled attainment test is 
failed. For the July 8, 1988 ozone episode, the deterministic test is 
passed for the future year 2007 for Rhode Island (i.e. all grid cells 
for every hour of that day using 2007 emissions are below 0.124 ppm). 
For the other modeled strategy days (i.e., August 15, 1987; August 17, 
1987; June 22, 1988; and July 11, 1988), neither the 1999 nor the 2007 
CALGRID modeling performed for the Rhode Island area predicts ozone 
concentrations below the one-hour ozone standard (0.124 ppm) at every 
grid cell for every hour of every strategy day modeled. The maximum 
predicted 2007 concentration in the Rhode Island nonattainment area for 
the relevant episodes is 0.140 ppm, which occurred for the July 11 
episode. The 2007 modeling was performed for two episode days: July 8 
and July 11. Only these two days could be run for 2007, because 2007 
boundary conditions were not available for the other strategy days. 
This maximum concentration is in western Rhode Island on the border 
with Connecticut, and is the result of transport into Rhode Island. 
Since the CALGRID model does not predict ozone concentrations below the 
one-hour ozone standard (0.124 ppm) at every grid cell for every hour 
of every episode day modeled, the strict deterministic test is not 
passed. Although the CALGRID model, as run for this analysis, does not 
pass the strict deterministic test at every grid cell, when additional 
weight-of-evidence analyses are considered, attainment is demonstrated.
    Rhode Island submitted an analysis using the model predicted change 
in ozone to estimate a future air quality design value. In this 
analysis, Rhode Island uses the photochemical ozone modeling in a 
relative sense. In other word, Rhode Island uses the modeled ozone 
concentrations, from the EPA-approved CALGRID model, in conjunction 
with monitored ozone air quality data. Rhode Island conducted an 
analysis which shows how the photochemical modeling results, when 
applied to ozone design values at the West Greenwich, East Providence 
and Narragansett monitors, predict attainment at these three monitors 
by 2007 after taking into account anticipated emission reductions from 
the NOX SIP call and the Tier 2/Low Sulfur program. The 
results show that with the planned emission reductions in the two 
precursor emissions (VOC and NOX), ground-level ozone 
concentrations will be below the ambient standard by the 2007 
attainment date. The steps Rhode Island DEM used in this analysis are 
discussed in the next four subsections.
1. Base Year Ozone Design Values
    In the attainment demonstration, Rhode Island DEM reviewed ozone 
monitoring data to determine a base-year design value for each monitor 
in Rhode Island. Ozone data collected in 1995, 1996, and 1997 were used 
for calculating 1997 design values. Using 1997 design values versus 
1999 design values results in a conservative analysis.
2. Ozone Reduction Between 1999 and 2007
    The second step of this approach consists of comparing 
photochemical modeling run results in order to determine the predicted 
ozone reduction at each ozone monitor in Rhode Island between 1999 and 
2007. Modeling runs were not performed for 1997 but were performed for 
1999. The Rhode Island DEM's use of modeling results for 1999 is 
conservative since as emissions reductions that occurred between 1997 
and 1999 are not

[[Page 7484]]

accounted for and relied on. Modeling results for 1999 were then 
compared with modeling results for 2007 (only two strategy days, July 8 
and July 11, are used for 2007, because these are the only two days for 
which 2007 boundary conditions are available) to estimate changes 
between 1999 and 2007.
    The average predicted change in ozone levels between 1999 and 2007 
was determined for each 9-cell block of surface cells containing and 
surrounding each Rhode Island monitor (i.e., the cell containing the 
monitor and the 8 surrounding cells). The average predicted change in 
ozone level was then divided by the 1999 average modeled concentration, 
in order to calculate the percent ozone reduction between 1999 and 
2007. The percent ozone reduction for each monitoring location in Rhode 
Island are presented in the state's submittal.
3. Predicted Ozone Design Values for 2007
    The third step was to determine a 2007 ozone design value for each 
Rhode Island ozone monitoring station location. This was accomplished 
by reducing the 1997 ozone design value by the percent ozone reduction 
predicted for each monitoring location derived in step 2, above. If the 
resulting design value dropped below the one-hour ozone standard, it is 
reasonable to assume that the monitor can attain the one-hour ozone 
standard by 2007. Rhode Island showed in their submittal that the 
predicted 2007 design values for all monitors in Rhode Island are all 
below the one-hour ozone NAAQS, except for one day at the East 
Providence monitor. As discussed in detail below, additional reduction 
in emissions will bring this monitor's predicted design value below the 
standard by 2007 as well.
    For the West Greenwich monitor (the monitor currently with the 
highest design value), there was a reduction in ozone levels of 24 
percent for the July 8 episode and a reduction in ozone levels of 13 
percent at the West Greenwich monitor for the July 11 episode. For both 
episodes, the future adjusted design value for the West Greenwich 
monitor is predicted to be below the one-hour ozone standard (0.105 ppm 
for July 8 and 0.124 ppm for July 11.)
    It should also be noted that Rhode Island DEM performed this same 
analysis for all of the ozone monitors in Massachusetts, New Hampshire 
and Maine that are also in the CALGRID modeling domain (i.e., the areas 
downwind of Rhode Island that may be affected by pollution transport 
from Rhode Island on ozone conducive days). The results from this 
analysis, which are contained in the submittal, show that all of these 
monitors are predicted to have ozone values below the one-hour standard 
by 2007. This is consistent with the EPA-approved attainment 
demonstrations for both New Hampshire (67 FR 72574; 12/6/02) and 
Massachusetts for both the Eastern (67 FR 72576; 12/6/02) and Western 
Massachusetts (66 FR 665; 1/3/01) serious ozone nonattainment area.
4. Predicted Ozone Design Values for 2007 With the Tier 2/Gasoline 
Sulfur Program
    As previously noted, the CALGRID runs for 2007 included the 
benefits of the NOX SIP call as well as other CAA measures, 
but did not account for the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program. The Tier 2/
Gasoline Sulfur program consists of emission reductions due to more 
protective tailpipe emissions standards for all passenger vehicles, 
including sport utility vehicles (SUVs), minivans, vans and pick-up 
trucks, as well as lower standards for sulfur in gasoline. These new 
standards require passenger vehicles to be 77 to 95 percent cleaner 
than those on the road today and to reduce the sulfur content of 
gasoline by up to 90 percent. This program, which does not achieve 
emission reductions until 2004 and beyond, was not included in the 
CALGRID modeling analysis discussed above.
    Rhode Island DEM, however, has looked at the EPA modeling performed 
in 1999 \12\ to assess the effectiveness of the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur. 
For three episodes in the summer of 1995, EPA performed two sets of 
modeling runs: one run with 2007 CAA emission files including emission 
reductions associated with Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program and a second 
run that did not include Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program emission 
reductions. In both cases, the CAA emission files included EPA's 
NOX SIP Call emission reductions. After the modeling runs 
were completed, EPA used the modeling results in a relative manner to 
estimate the percent ozone reduction associated with the Tier 2/
Gasoline Sulfur program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See ``Technical Support Document for the Tier 2/Gasoline 
Sulfur Ozone Modeling Analyses,'' EPA420-R-99-031, December 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rhode Island DEM included the predicted ozone design values for the 
2007 CAA run and the 2007 Tier 2 run for each county in the Rhode 
Island nonattainment area. As shown in their submittal, the benefit at 
all ozone monitors in Rhode Island is at least an additional 0.001 ppm, 
over what CALGRID predicted. The improvement at the East Providence 
monitor is 1%. The Tier 2 modeling performed by EPA showed all 2007 
design values for Rhode Island less than the one-hour standard. This 
combined with the results of the CALGRID analysis add to the weight-of-
evidence.
    Rhode Island DEM believes it is reasonable to conclude that the 
design value at the East Providence monitor for 2007 will be reduced by 
approximately 1 percent once the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program is 
implemented, which will result in attainment of the one-hour standard 
at that monitor and throughout Rhode Island.
5. Conclusions From the Future Air Quality Design Value Analysis
    Through this additional analysis, Rhode Island DEM has demonstrated 
that substantial ozone reductions can be expected to occur after the 
implementation of a number of control strategies that are in place both 
within and upwind of the New England Domain. Those strategies include 
EPA's NOX SIP Call as well as EPA's Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur 
program. Therefore, EPA believes it is reasonable to conclude that the 
Rhode Island nonattainment area will attain the one-hour ozone standard 
by 2007. While the absolute modeling results do not demonstrate 
attainment, the modeling results are useful in demonstrating a relative 
reduction in ozone levels sufficient to demonstrate attainment in 2007.
6. Additional Evidence To Support Attainment in Rhode Island
    In addition to the ozone design value analysis performed by the 
Rhode Island DEM, EPA performed an additional design value analysis 
using a slightly different method. EPA used the CALGRID modeling in a 
relative sense to estimate a future design value. EPA compared base 
case CALGRID runs to future case CALGRID runs to estimate the 
improvement in ozone air quality levels between the base and future 
cases. Four strategy days (August 15 and 17 1987; July 8, 1988 and July 
11, 1988)\13\ are used in this analysis, which compared the improvement 
in modeled air quality between the base and future modeling cases. The 
following procedure is applied. First, base case CALGRID runs are 
examined to discern the maximum one-hour ozone concentration modeled in 
Rhode Island. The four strategy days are all examined.

[[Page 7485]]

Next, the same area is used to determine future modeled ozone values. 
The modeled maximum results of the four strategy days are averaged and 
a reduction factor calculated from the base case to the future case. 
This reduction factor represents the amount of ozone reduced in this 
area, as the result of the emission reductions modeled. This reduction 
factor is used to adjust the average ozone design value for this part 
of the model domain (i.e., Rhode Island), as monitored between 1985 and 
1990. This monitored design value represents both the base case model 
years of 1987 and 1988 and also the design values used in 1991 to 
classify one-hour nonattainment areas. The future design value is 
further reduced when the benefits of EPA's Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur 
program are factored in.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The June 22, 1988 strategy day is not used because of 
problems re-analyzing the base case model run for this episode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This additional analysis also shows that air quality design values 
in Rhode Island can reasonably be expected to be reduced below 0.124 
ppm based on continued additional reductions within the domain and 
reductions upwind, reflected in the future year boundary conditions, 
and the benefits of EPA's Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program.
7. Summary of the Ozone Modeling
    In summary, the ozone modeling submitted for the Rhode Island area 
is consistent with the CAA and EPA guidance and demonstrates 
attainment. Other information, which provides additional support for 
concluding the Rhode Island area will attain in 2007 are the ambient 
ozone data trends and a trajectory analysis of exceedance days in the 
area.

D. What Are the Conclusions From the Ozone Trends?

    There are three ozone air quality monitors in the Rhode Island 
nonattainment area that have data from 2000-2002. They are in the Rhode 
Island cities and towns of West Greenwich, East Providence, and 
Narragansett. The original serious classification of the nonattainment 
area was based on data from the 1987 through 1989 time period. Since 
then and up to and including 2002 ozone data, all 3 sites show a 
decrease in ozone due to emission reductions, both within Rhode Island 
and also upwind.
    At the three Rhode Island monitors the ozone trend is downward. At 
the West Greenwich site, the one-hour ozone design value has dropped 
from 0.162 ppm in 1988 to 0.130 ppm in 2002, a drop of 20 percent. This 
site is not in attainment, based on 2000-2002 ozone data. At the East 
Providence site, the one-hour design value has dropped from 0.138 ppm 
in 1988 (site moved from Providence to East Providence in 1997) to 
0.127 ppm in 2002, for a drop of 8 percent. This site, too, is not in 
attainment, based on 2000-2002 ozone data. The Narragansett site only 
has data for the last five years so no trend was calculated. The 
current design value for the Narragansett site is 0.124 ppm, which is 
below the standard. To show how close West Greenwich and East 
Providence are to meeting the NAAQS one can look at the fifth highest 
value over the same 3-year period 2000-2002. The fifth highest value 
for West Greenwich is 0.127 ppm and for East Providence it is 0.125 
ppm. The sixth highest value is below the one-hour standard at these 
sites.
    The ozone trend is also downward at the Truro, MA ozone monitor, 
the only monitor in eastern Massachusetts with a design value over the 
one-hour standard. At the Truro site, the one-hour design value has 
dropped from 0.146 ppm in 1989 to 0.130 ppm in 2002, for a drop of 11 
percent. This site is not in attainment, based on 2000-2002 ozone data. 
To show how close Truro is to meeting the NAAQS one can look at the 
fifth highest value over the same 3-year period 2000-2002, the fifth 
highest value at the Truro site is below the level of the one-hour 
ozone standard.
    Based on the overall downward trend in one-hour ozone 
concentrations in Rhode Island, and because precursor emissions are 
projected to keep falling, both within the nonattainment area and 
upwind from it, there is no reason to believe that the downward trend 
in ozone concentrations will not continue over the near term. The 
future emission reductions will be a result of the following: continued 
benefits from tighter standards on vehicles (National Low Emission 
Vehicles or CA LEV in upwind areas) due to fleet turnover; the 
reductions from large point sources due to the OTC NOX 
Budget Program and EPA's NOX SIP call; other federal control 
measures such controls on non-road engines; and the Tier 2 vehicle and 
low sulfur gasoline program.

E. What Do the Ozone Exceedance Day Trajectory Analyses Show?

    Trajectory analysis is a tool for assessing atmospheric transport 
and identifying likely source regions of locally measured air 
contaminants. The Rhode Island DEM used the HYSPLIT-4 (Hybrid Single-
Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory) model, developed by NOAA's 
Air Resources Lab (ARL), to compute backward trajectories.
    To assess airflow patterns on days when any Rhode Island monitor 
recorded exceedances of the one-hour ozone NAAQS during the period 
1999-2002, 24-hour backward trajectories were computed by the Rhode 
Island DEM. The surface-based trajectories (start height of 10 meters) 
for these days, indicators of shorter range transport, follow a general 
track that crosses near the New York metropolitan area before turning 
northeastward toward Rhode Island. These trajectories cross no high 
emission areas in Rhode Island. Upper-level trajectories (500 and 1000 
meters elevation), indicators of long-range transport, generally begin 
farther west over New York State, Pennsylvania or Ohio and follow a 
more west-to-east track, passing north of the New York metropolitan 
area. Since the trajectories for the exceedance days strongly resemble 
one another, the Rhode Island DEM concluded that there is a consistent 
meteorological pattern and source region for ozone and precursors when 
monitors in Rhode Island exceed the one-hour ozone NAAQS. Furthermore, 
the Rhode Island DEM concluded that one-hour exceedance level ozone 
concentrations will occur at the West Greenwich, East Providence and 
Narragansett monitors only if the air reaching these monitors had 
previously crossed nearby high emission areas such as the greater New 
York metropolitan area. It should be noted, that on all days when there 
are exceedances at West Greenwich, East Providence and Narragansett, 
there are also exceedances in Connecticut. EPA concludes that without 
the influence of the emissions from the greater New York metropolitan 
area, no one-hour exceedances would have occurred at these monitors. 
Attainment demonstrations already approved by EPA for Connecticut and 
the New York city area show attainment will be achieved in 2007, and 
likewise this attainment demonstration for Rhode Island concludes that 
attainment will be achieved in 2007.
    To corroborate the Rhode Island DEM's results, EPA performed its 
own trajectory analyses for those days when there were exceedances of 
the one-hour ozone standard on either Cape Cod, in southeastern 
Massachusetts, and/or in Rhode Island, over the three year period 1999 
through 2001. This area encompasses the ozone monitoring sites in 
Truro, MA; Fairhaven, MA; Narragansett, RI; East Providence, RI; and 
West Greenwich, RI. The exceedance days at these sites during 1999-2001 
are as follows: June 7, 1999, July 6, 1999, July 16, 1999, June 10, 
2000, June 30, 2001, July 25, 2001, August 7, 2001, and August 9, 2001.
    EPA's trajectory analyses of the days with ozone exceedances at 
these sites (Truro, MA, Fairhaven, MA,

[[Page 7486]]

Narragansett, RI, East Providence, RI and West Greenwich, RI) support 
the Rhode Island DEM trajectories and the CALGRID modeling which shows 
that the most probable source region of the exceedances at these sites 
is areas to the south and west of Rhode Island, including Connecticut 
and the New York City area. Connecticut is less than 20 miles from West 
Greenwich or less than 2 hours of typical meteorological transport 
time. Details of this analysis are found in the TSD for this action. 
Both the analyses done by the Rhode Island DEM and EPA support the 
conclusion that without the influence of emissions from upwind, no 
exceedances would have occurred at the Rhode Island ozone monitors. 
This further supports the conclusion that the Rhode Island ozone 
nonattainment area will attain in 2007.

F. Are the Causes of the Recent Violation Being Addressed?

    The Rhode Island ozone nonattainment area was in attainment for 
three consecutive, three-years periods from 1998-2000 (i.e., 1996-1998, 
1997-1999, and 1998-2000). CALGRID sensitivity runs looked at the 
effectiveness of NOX reductions versus VOC reductions by 
reducing each pollutant individually within the domain by varying 
percentages (i.e., 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%). These sensitivity runs 
concluded that reducing nitrogen oxide emission reductions is a more 
effective ozone control strategy for the New England Domain. 
Furthermore, in order to assess the role of transport into the New 
England domain, sensitivity modeling runs were preformed using very 
clean boundary conditions. These runs use boundary conditions from the 
OTAG run IN60, which assumed the reductions similar to NOX 
SIP call emissions, plus an additional 60 percent reduction in 
NOX from the ozone nonattainment areas classified as serious 
or above. These runs show that upwind NOX reductions would 
be effective at reducing ozone throughout southern New England, 
including in Rhode Island where the current one-hour ozone violations 
occur. From these sensitivity runs as well as its trajectory analyses, 
EPA concludes that elevated ozone levels at the Rhode Island monitors 
are principally due to ozone and NOX generated in 
Connecticut and upwind areas. Rhode Island DEM further concluded based 
on CAMx Source Apportionment Modeling described in EPA's October 27, 
1998 Final Rulemaking on the NOX SIP Call (63 FR 57355), 
that reducing NOX emissions in adjacent upwind areas--
Connecticut, New York City and New Jersey--will significantly reduce 
ozone levels at the Rhode Island monitors. Emissions of NOX 
and VOC will also be lowered in Rhode Island as well, as a result of 
the emission control programs listed in Table 2. These local controls, 
combined with upwind controls will result in the Rhode Island ozone 
nonattainment area attaining in 2007.
    As part of its submittal, Rhode Island DEM included the 
NOX emission reductions anticipated to occur in Connecticut, 
New York City and New Jersey between 1999 and 2007 and between 2002 and 
2007. The reduction between 2002 and 2007 was intended to illustrate 
the reductions that can be expected to reduce current air quality 
levels being monitored in Rhode Island. The NOX reduction 
expected to occur in Connecticut, New York City and New Jersey between 
1999 and 2002 is expected to be 126.5 tons per summer day. Those 
emission reductions have already occurred, and presumably affect the 
current ozone levels measured in 2002. Between 2002 and 2007, the 
NOX reduction expected to occur in Connecticut, New York 
City and New Jersey is expected to be a bit higher, at 137 tons per 
summer day. These reductions, which largely have not occurred yet, will 
benefit future ozone levels in Rhode Island and will help the Rhode 
Island ozone nonattainment area meet attainment by 2007.
    As part of its submittal, Rhode Island DEM also calculated the 
NOX and VOC emission reductions projected to occur between 
1999 and 2007 in the Rhode Island area. VOC emissions in Rhode Island 
are projected from 1999 to 2007 to go from 141.1 tons per summer day 
(tpsd) to 119.0 tpsd, which is a reduction of 22.1 tpsd or 15.6 
percent. NOX emissions in Rhode Island are projected from 
1999 to 2007 to go from 93.1 tpsd to 73.6 tpsd, which is a reduction of 
19.5 tpsd or 20.9 percent. When combined with the significant 
reductions in NOX emissions expected in upwind states by 
2007, the Rhode Island emissions inventory data provides additional 
reason to anticipate that the area will attain the one-hour ozone 
standard by 2007.

G. Is the Rhode Island Mid-Course Review Consistent With EPA Guidance?

    As discussed above, the Rhode Island serious ozone nonattainment 
area attained the ozone standard based on ozone data collected in 1997-
1999 and 1998-2000, but is now violating the standard. Rhode Island DEM 
has submitted an attainment demonstration supplemented with a weight-
of-evidence analysis; therefore, Rhode Island DEM needs to commit to a 
mid-course review. The Rhode Island DEM has committed to perform a mid-
course review for this area by December 31, 2004.

H. Is the Rhode Island RACM Analysis Consistent With the CAA and EPA 
Guidance?

    The EPA has reviewed the SIP and the RACM analysis submittal for 
the Rhode Island area to determine if it includes all required RACM 
measures and sufficient documentation concerning available RACM 
measures. The RACM analysis will be subject to a public hearing on 
February 27, 2003.
    The trajectory analyses, which are discussed in greater detail in 
section VII.E, indicate that elevated ozone levels at the three Rhode 
Island monitors are largely the result of local transport from upwind 
high emission areas in Connecticut, New York City and New Jersey.\14\ 
In addition to what the Rhode Island DEM submitted, EPA performed a 
trajectory analysis of each of the days during 1999 through 2001 when 
exceedances of the one-hour ozone NAAQS were monitored in the Rhode 
Island ozone nonattainment area. That analysis shows similar results, 
i.e., that the source region for these exceedances is areas to the 
south and west of Rhode Island.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ These areas have approved attainment demonstrations and 
also have EPA-enforceable emission reduction strategies to bring 
about attainment of the one-hour standard by 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CAM-x source apportionment modeling showed that emissions in 
Connecticut and Rhode Island combined contribute only 5% to the 
anthropogenic one-hour ozone levels in Rhode Island. This CAM-x 
modeling also shows that Rhode Island cannot attain the one-hour NAAQS 
without substantial NOX emission reductions in upwind 
states, and that, since upwind controls will not be fully implemented 
prior to 2007, the adoption of additional in-state emission reduction 
measures would not advance the State's attainment date.
    The trajectory analyses and both the CALGRID and CAM-x modeling 
discussed above indicate that Rhode Island must rely on significant 
emission reductions from upwind states in order to attain the one-hour 
ozone standard, and that additional emission reduction measures adopted 
in Rhode Island alone would have a sufficiently small impact on ozone 
levels that they could not advance the attainment date in the Rhode 
Island area. Nonetheless, the Rhode Island DEM RACM analysis does 
review control measures that could

[[Page 7487]]

reduce emissions of VOC and NOX in Rhode Island and analyzed 
whether adoption of such measures might lead to attainment earlier than 
2007.
    Rhode Island DEM examined emissions from all significant emission 
source categories to assess whether there are any additional RACM that 
could be adopted. The methodology used consists of a two-step 
procedure. First, Rhode Island DEM reviewed its 2007 emissions 
inventory to identify significant source categories. After that, Rhode 
Island DEM screened potential control measures for the significant 
emitting source categories to determine if they could provide 
sufficient benefits to accelerate attainment in the Rhode Island area, 
and, if so, analyzed if the measures were feasible.
    The methodology used by the Rhode Island DEM is based on the RACM 
analysis performed by EPA for the Greater Connecticut serious ozone 
nonattainment area. See 66 FR 634; January 3, 2001. The RACM analysis 
for Greater Connecticut looked at projected 2007 emissions from various 
source categories after taking into account CAA-mandatory controls, 
additionally adopted regional and national controls, and State-adopted 
SIP controls. The RACM analysis then assumed that stationary sources 
that have already been controlled nationally, regionally or locally in 
the SIP would not be effective candidates for additional controls that 
could be considered RACM, since these categories have only recently 
been required to reduce emissions or are about to shortly.
    For VOC emissions, Rhode Island DEM reviewed its 2007 emissions 
inventory for stationary point, area, and non-road sources and culled 
from it the sixteen largest source categories. Emissions from each were 
at least one ton per summer day (tpsd), and in their aggregate 
emissions from these sixteen source categories represent approximately 
90 percent of the total VOC inventory from these three sectors. Rhode 
Island DEM then analyzed whether control requirements exist for each 
source category, and found that in most instances state or federal 
control are currently in place.
    For example, the largest emitting source category from these three 
sectors is the area source surface cleaning category. Rhode Island DEM 
estimates 2007 emissions for this activity will be 12.44 tpsd. However, 
Rhode Island DEM notes that most of the sources in the small surface 
cleaning sector, including all vapor degreasers and cold cleaners, are 
regulated by Rhode Island Air Pollution Control (APC) Regulation No. 
36, ``Control of Emissions from Organic Solvent Cleaning,'' which 
became effective in 1996. This regulation incorporates control 
requirements from EPA's Control Technique Guideline (CTG) for this 
source category, as well as the requirements of EPA's 1994 National 
Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Halogenated 
Solvent Cleaners. These requirements represent Reasonably Available 
Control Technology (RACT). Rhode Island DEM believes that any 
additional control measures for this activity would result in 
relatively small decreases in emissions and would not accelerate the 
State's attainment of the one-hour ozone NAAQS in emissions.
    Control measures for the remaining VOC source categories were 
reviewed in a similar manner, and then Rhode Island DEM performed a 
similar analysis for the largest NOX emitting source 
categories. Rhode Island's conclusion from this analysis is that, based 
on the types of measures reviewed and the costs of these programs, in 
association with the potential emission reduction benefits in the Rhode 
Island area, there are no stationary point, area, or non-road RACM that 
could be adopted in the state that would advance attainment prior to 
2007.
    Rhode Island also analyzed whether there were any additional mobile 
source measures that could be implemented that represent RACM. The 
Rhode Island DEM is already implementing a wide range of statewide 
mobile source emissions reduction programs including Stage 2 vapor 
recovery, enhanced inspection and maintenance, the national low 
emissions vehicle program, and reformulated gasoline. In addition to 
the above programs, Rhode Island implements transportation projects 
under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program, 
designed to reduce ozone precursor emissions in the transportation 
sector. The CMAQ program in Rhode Island's 2003-2004 Transportation 
Improvement Program (details are provided in the submittal and the TSD 
for this proposal) includes measures aimed at increasing bicycle, ferry 
and public transit travel, eliminating traffic congestion through 
improving transportation management, signalization and roadways, 
reducing emissions from diesel on-road vehicles with a heavy duty 
vehicle inspection program, and the installation of emissions controls 
on public transit diesel buses. However, implementation of these 
projects, and other similar programs that will be funded with CMAQ 
monies in the coming years, will only achieve a minimal emission 
reduction of 0.07 tons per summer day of VOC and 0.06 tons per summer 
day of NOX. This small reduction in precursors will not 
result in an acceleration of the attainment date. Since a large number 
of mobile source emissions control programs are already being 
implemented and since additional measures of the type that have been 
funded by CMAQ monies would not accelerate the attainment date, Rhode 
Island has not identified any additional mobile source RACM measures. 
The Rhode Island DEM's conclusion on mobile sources is that Rhode 
Island is currently implementing all reasonably available control 
measures for mobile sources, since the benefits from these projects is 
minimal compared to Rhode Island's own emissions and even smaller when 
compared to the transport of ozone and ozone precursors.
    EPA concludes that based on the available information, there are no 
additional technologically and economically feasible emission control 
measures in Rhode Island that will advance the attainment date for the 
Rhode Island ozone nonattainment area. Thus no potential measure can be 
considered RACM for purposes of section 172(c)(1) for the Rhode Island 
area for its one-hour ozone attainment demonstration. The Rhode Island 
DEM analysis is consistent with EPA requirements, which as noted above 
were upheld by the DC Circuit Court. The EPA therefore proposes that 
the Rhode Island SIP is consistent with the requirements for RACM.
    Although EPA does not believe that section 172(c)(1) requires 
implementation of additional measures for this area, this conclusion is 
not necessarily valid for other areas.

I. What About Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets?

    On June 8, 2001 (66 FR 30811) EPA approved the Rhode Island post-
1996 plan which included a 1999 VOC motor vehicle emissions budgets of 
41.57 tons per summer day VOC, as well as a NOX budget of 
46.40 tons per summer day of NOX. These 1999 motor vehicle 
emissions budgets were formally determined adequate by EPA New England 
for use in transportation conformity on September 29, 1998. Subsequent 
to the rate-of-progress SIPs, on January 27, 2003, Rhode Island DEM 
submitted its ozone attainment demonstration to EPA, for parallel 
processing, which includes new motor vehicle emissions budgets for both 
VOC and NOX for 2007, and these budgets are shown in Table 
3. EPA is proposing these budgets for approval.

[[Page 7488]]



 Table 3.--2007 Emissions Budgets for On-road Mobile Sources in Tons per
                            Summer Day (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  2007 VOC     2007 NOX
                     Area                          budget       budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rhode Island..................................       30.37        33.62
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 2, 1999, the United States Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision on certain provisions of 
EPA's 1997 conformity rule in response to a case brought by the 
Environmental Defense Fund. As a result of the decision, a conformity 
determination cannot be made using the submitted motor vehicle 
emissions budgets until EPA makes a positive determination that the 
submitted budget is adequate. In response to the court's decision, EPA 
issued guidance on our new adequacy process on May 14, 1999 \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Memo from Gay MacGregor, Director, Regional and State 
Programs Division, USEPA Office of Mobile Sources, to Regional Air 
Division Directors, titled ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation 
of March 2, 1999 Conformity Court decision,'' dated May 14, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA believes that these motor vehicle emissions budgets are 
adequate for use in future transportation conformity analyses as these 
budgets meet all of the requirements set forth by EPA's adequacy 
criteria, were developed using EPA's MOBILE6 model, and are consistent 
with the attainment demonstration. However, prior to making an adequacy 
finding, EPA must administer a 30 day comment period for these budgets. 
Therefore, in today's action EPA is opening up the adequacy comment 
period on these budgets to run concurrently with the comment period for 
all of today's action. In addition, this Federal Register Notice will 
appear on EPA's Transportation and Air Quality planning website at 
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/conform/adequacy.htm. All comments on 
these budgets should be submitted to EPA using the procedure outlined 
earlier in this notice.

J. Contingency Measures

    Rhode Island addressed the contingency measure requirement of 
section 172(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act by demonstrating that the 
emission reductions from the federal on-road motor vehicle Tier 2 
tailpipe standards and sulfur in gasoline rules, and the federal non-
road engine control program that accrue between 2007 and mid-2009, 
which is the date by which emission reductions from contingency 
measures would need to occur, will achieve more emission reductions 
than Rhode Island needs to meet its three percent attainment 
contingency obligation. We propose approval of Rhode Island's 
contingency measure submittal.

VIII. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to fully approve as meeting CAA section 182(c)(2) 
the ground-level one-hour ozone attainment demonstration State 
Implementation Plan for the Rhode Island nonattainment area submitted 
by Rhode Island on January 27, 2003. EPA is proposing an attainment 
date of November 15, 2007 for the area, and is proposing that the RACM 
analysis for the Rhode Island area is consistent with the requirements 
of section 172(c)(1). EPA proposes approval of Rhode Island's 
contingency measures submittal, which is consistent with the 
requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the CAA. This notice also proposes 
to approve 2007 motor vehicle emissions budgets for Rhode Island into 
the SIP.
    This SIP is being proposed under a procedure called parallel 
processing, whereby EPA proposes rulemaking action concurrent with the 
state's procedures for amending its regulations. If the proposed plan 
is substantially changed, EPA will evaluate those changes and may 
publish another notice of proposed rulemaking. If no substantial 
changes are made, EPA will publish a Final Rulemaking Notice on the 
revisions. Before EPA can finally approve this plan Rhode Island must 
finally adopt the SIP revision and submit it formally to EPA for 
incorporation into the SIP.
    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this 
proposal. These issues will be considered before EPA takes final 
action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking 
procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA Regional office 
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this action.
    A more detailed description of the state submittal and EPA's 
evaluation are included in a Technical Support Document (TSD) prepared 
in support of this rulemaking action. A copy of the TSD is available 
upon request from the EPA Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES 
section of this document.

IX. Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
states, on the relationship between the national government and the 
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule 
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does

[[Page 7489]]

not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: February 6, 2003.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 03-3698 Filed 2-13-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P